Re: Emacs inserts hardwired org-agenda-files variable, overwriting user options

[Jean Louis]

* daniela-spit@gmx.it <daniela-spit@gmx.it> [2020-12-12 05:41]:
> > And I think it is possible for anybody regardless of programming skill
> > level to make one's own system of management of tasks within less than
> > a week that will get more aligned to personal individualized way of
> > handling tasks, then trying to accommodate personal needs to software
> > that may have gone one completly wrong direction.
> 
> If I said that I would be barraged by accusations of rudeness! :)

The key is in steganography:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography

Org mode is popular within subset of population using it where each
other encourage to use it more regardless of how much tedious efforts
it needs itself just to function how users would like it. Additionally
majority of users use functions of Org mode which they would not need
would they be simple be organized. A person well organized does not
look throug agenda as that means lack of organization. Agenda helps
those which are not organized. Just look at any friend or person who
organizes life without computer and compare to people using Org
mode. Software should replace slow methods with papers and make
planning faster and non-repetitive. Any software shall help human to
speed up actions.

In general Org mode is excellent for personal TODO lists. That is what
is offered in the menu, that is what is advertised. Problem is that
there is no warning for users that personal TODO lists are not meant
for anything but that. There is no collaboration, putting TODO items
eveywhere IS procrastination. Using org-agenda to find procrastination
is another procrastination. Trying to glue everything together is
absence of good planning and not planning.

While reading how people write to mailing list trying to solve
problems they would never solve in the real world with paper I am
getting more and more surprised.

What Org mode needs is at least few Wiki pages where various methods
of planning are presented as that could be useful to help people
minimize their procrastination.

My experience comes from writing plans since more than 25 years. I was
always writing it on paper. Actions are chronologically and logically
ordered. Main objectives are always well defined for which purpose
subordinate actions have to be conducted. If main objectives are
fullfiled those subordinate actions become redundant or superfluous.

>From Org info file:

> 5 TODO Items
> ************

> Org mode does not maintain TODO lists as separate documents(1).
> Instead, TODO items are an integral part of the notes file, because TODO
> items usually come up while taking notes!

For personal planning this may be fine for many, but I consider it bad
habbit. If there is an action item then put any information necessary
for that action within the action item. Print it along if
necessary. Handle your thinker notes first once and completely and
include what is necessary in action items.

- person will not read the notes written back in time over and over
  again.

- if notes are not necessary for the action, why put them in front of
  oneself to be read

- horrible situations will take place if those notes which are not
  necessary are put in front of collaborator who is now expected to
  read action item and fulfill the action

> because TODO items usually come up while taking notes!

My action items have been written in project documents executed by
multiple groups of people in multiple countries on distances of 5000+
kilometers away including by people who have never seen me face to
face. I have never put "notes" together with action items.

Whoever wrote that "TODO items usually comes up while taking notes"
was referring to oneself and imposes this habit which I never had onto
others.

In other words the manual imposes specific method of planning without
comparison to other methods of planning. Then users learn that is
right thing to do, ah, let me put everything together.

Since 2016 almost all project planning was written by Org mode as I
find it useful to get LaTeX/PDF output. It is then printed, carried
physically by people on the ground and signed with initialy physically
by hand as DONE with the date and time. There known objectives and
those are targets to be fulfilled.

Any notes arriving back from collaborators are not placed into project
planning. If such would enhance project planning they could become
part of planning for the next project.

But generally the feedback notes do not relate to project planning
itself, they relate to people, organizations, findings on ground, they
are part of the report. It is not necessary to re-write the report
back into any Org file as the plan is separate from reports and
executions. Conclusions which come later could result in some new
plan. But initial plan is not to be mixed with new information, it is
rather kept intact and maybe improved for next time execution.

> With Org mode, simply mark any entry in a tree as being a TODO
> item.  In this way, information is not duplicated, and the entire
> context from which the TODO item emerged is always present.

That is the method I speak about. It is method of lack of planning but
making "any entry in a tree as being a TODO item". That may be good
for personal planning if those TODO lists are not many. As soon as
lists become even little complex it will become opposite of what one
intended to have. Instead of organized lists one get disorganized
lists. TODO is everywhere.

> Of course, this technique for managing TODO items scatters them
> throughout your notes file.  Org mode compensates for this by
> providing methods to give you an overview of all the things that you
> have to do.

The Org manual does admit that the offered method is not a method at
all. It speaks of habits of some disorganized authors who simply did
not knew better. That TODO items are scattered it is not even
considered bad habbit. That it prevents any kind of collaboration is
not considered a bug. That it will ask for millions of compensations
to get the overview of all things one has to do is presented as
something common or normal. It is common only to procrastinators.

My projects in Org mode were not written with TODO tags mostly because
the projects are often duplicated or enhanced for various groups and
persons and are NOT personaly. Duplicated projects would give me
duplicate results if I would be using Org agenda. Which I do not
use. I was looking at it from viewpoint to see what it does, but I
never used. Why should I if I have not scattered my lists of actions
around?

If I have assigned some actions to me personally yesterday, I will
know next day what is to be done. If there are many there will be list
of things. Because list of things is anyway action item there will be
no need to place large "TODO" tag there. Everything is TODO. When
completed check it out. In collaborative execution of projects it has
to be signed by initials and checked out with date and time. We want
things done, and not spend time on computer to satisfy bad design of
software that is not meant to be project planning software. Why should
I be switching TODO items on computer back and forth when completed?
Sounds redundant to me personally. If item is action it is in the list
of actions, there is no need to mark it TODO. I may mark it completed
and never turn it back again as TODO.

Maybe every Org user could improve their execution of tasks in life by
actually printing the tasks, by actually using PDF export and using
papers.

Prepare the list for printing. Your thinking will be different if you
need to print it. Your list will have more sense. Especially try to
prepare the list for other people to understand it. You will minimize
the number of scattered intertwined notes around the action items this
way. Print your list. Execute what is in the list. Compare the time
you spend by using papers. You want your things done, you don't want
marking properties, tags all the time. Get it done. Mark whole project
as DONE in your computer file, archive or discard it.

Then later in some other project try to do it with the Org mode alone
on computer and without printing. Then see how much time you spend in
making "decorations" in your Org file like tags, properties,
etc. Review how many times you changed your schedule, deadline,
etc. In other words observe your own procrastination.

Compare the time you spend by using Org mode directly with the time
you spend by using papers.

Jean